Problem of face veil

[lovarabic]

Dear members, there has been lately a big discussion on niqab, in particular in the UK. J. Straw stated that the women wearing niqab want to separate themselves from society, and , in fact, refuse to integrate and to participate into local life.
I think that we need to have videos of niqabis explaining themselves, from their own experience, that their face veil does permit them to have social life, participate to local activities, religious as well as schools, associations, etc
The impact to have the direct information , I mean from a niqabed person herself, would be important to increase understanding between communities and make life easier for muslims in Europe.
Maybesuch documents exist. Sister Crystal wears the niqab, but she speaks wonderfully of her life, not specifically on the niqab problem which is quickly increasing in Europe. Niqabis members of Turn to Islam may want to propose something. It would be welcome. Thanks. Lovarabic

[amyaishazouaoui]

:salam2:

Personally the whole niqab thing is blown out of all proportion. It is not like what they say. I know of siters who work for british companies who wear niqab, when they decided to put it on, they just approached their employer and explained and they said yes!!!! Its all about the approach, and if you have a job interview with niqab on, surely is your mind they are looking at not your body, and if they wont employ you another will.

Also with this whole intergration in society thing, I urge every niqabi to go, when they are out shopping etc to be as polite, helpful and happy as possible, show them you are not opressed, say to the shop assistant good morning, thankyou and smily, they can see your eyes smiling. hold open doors for the elderly, let them sit down on the bus......... oh

************all this is being a good muslim**********************
is it not??????

:wasalam:

[hafz]

I think Jack Straw wanted to use the issue to isolate muslims. I also think the public especially in muslim areas can see women out in their niqaabs having a sociol life.
What about the school assistant who was dismissed wasnt she intergrating ?She was teaching in a different faith school but wasnt allowed to carry on even though the veil was only being worn infront of other male teachers .
I think this whole issue has come about so as to not make the veil acceptable to British soceity.

[amyaishazouaoui]

:salam2:

we only get a certain story, the one the media tells....... we dont have the truth about every single situaton!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:wasalam:

[lovarabic]

Dear amyaishazouaoui, this is why videos that would be publicly displaid, prepared by veiled muslimats explaining the reasons and advantages of their niqab, and their integration into local life, would help a lot...

[warda A]

asalam aleikum
i would like to say to all women who wear niqab that they are not alone
in yemen where i live now if u do not wear it u r the odd one out
every where in work places in markets you will find fully niqbed women
iam glad i wear it now, do u know when you wear it it is like a remainder for u to be humble?
all sisters be firm . u want to wear it explain the reasons behind it to whoever is inquiring in a good way, they may understand inshallah
ramadhan kareem

[Jannah03]

girl that is SO true, it really is a reminder to be humble and keps you in check. there have been times i wanted to give some people a talking to, but didnt. anywho how long have you been wearing it? i started in the SUMMER of this year...it was a bit difficult since here in kentucky it was just 100 degrees everyday but it was worth it.

[warda A]

hello sister

eid mubarak to u and all muslims

i started wearing it almost 4 yrs, ago. as i have said before i live in yemen in hadramout and u will not find women without it, maybe 1 or 2 -3 and most probably they are from outside yemen like palestine or iraq, but yemeny women wear them constantly, and with the heat u know we live in the desert but alhamdullilah we bear it all and at times u do not fill the heat at all, to tell u the truth it save u from heat wave and u know skin cancer and all.
so be brave and save follow your deen and save your skin in the bargain.
with God behind you, His arms around you, you can face whatever is ahead of you.
:wasalam:

[Shahzad]

well. hijab is the symbol of piety for women.
ppl are opposing it for a number of different reasons
to create a clash or spread hatered between muslims and non muslims

Many multinational companies who make cosmetics products dont want woman to take veil as if woman takes veil on, they know their product selling rate will get very low.

They will not be able to sell their prodcuts and market them using girls.

this is the time to Hold on islam firmly. The muslims renaissance has started.
we will see goood days soon inshALLAH

[Fatima_ahmad]

well its so sad to bring problems for muslims of the world..well islam and muslims are not the terrorist and they have no link with it

[MohammedMaksudul]

:salam2:

Here is one video of a muslimah with niqab.

oE7z9C-4T6o

Got it embedded, JazkAllah to the brothers and sisters who helped out.

[JenGiove]

:salam2: Sisters AND Brothers,

If you encounter video's of Niqabis...PLEASE! Share it! If you'd like, you can send me a VM or PM with the link and I can embed the video here for you if you do not know how. I think it would be a WONDERFUL idea to have more positive images and stories instead of all the hate and anger.

I learned how to embed them from this thread...<thank you Mabsoot>

http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showthread.php?t=207

[hayat84]

:salam2:
the real problem by y opinion,is that many new muslims are spreading the Islam and the real fear for the public opinion is the <chidren>.they are young and easily influenced.if a non uslim child looks everyday at a covered woman or a muslim man with Quran in his hands,then this child will be led to learn more about Islam.on the other hand,if the muslims don't take part to the social activities,well it's fault of the society,because it's society itself which puts the "wall of discrimination"between us and them,and how???they forbid us to cover our faces,they deny us a place for muslim reunions(mosques),they look at us like aliens,they many times deny a job to a hijabed woman(in Italy it happened that a muslim woman had found a job as teacher in an elementary school,but it was said her that she should put off her hijab for not to influence young children with her religion).none asked to himself why only muslims are bad looked?why all those groups of youngsters wearing tight jeans and a kilo of make up,are looked as normal?there are the "Emo",the "punk"and an amount of bad companies of young guys,but everybody has nothing better to do than focusing to muslim lifestyle.I also suspect that if someday a famous person gets interested to Islam,he/she would have some problems,because a famous person is a cathalisator of "energy";many other fans would get interested in Islam.give a look to Mchael Jackson's story:tti_sister::wasalam:

[msmoorad]

salaams to all
wonder if they will still have any objections if sisters had to say they want to be able to wear a bikini in public everyday?
im sure that would be OK- since there is freedom of religion and expression etc in UK

and Allah ta'ala knows best
jazakallah

[justoneofmillion]

:salam2:Al tough it is the sisters choice to wear it or not.Respectable Scholars have differed on this,there are enough fatwas out there check em out .I don't like posting fatwas at every occasion.

Now if the purpose of wearing it is to appear discreet and not catchy in the west, those sister will only get more noticed from the surrounding society,in some countries it has even become an object of dissimulation ,anonymity and that is not good at all.

I support and respect the sisters who wear it no matter what and as a result of the awareness to my own imperfection but I do not agree with it being a sign of humility in the context we are living in today in western countries.

Frankly I hate seeing people exaggerating and exposing these subjects all the time.

When it comes to Muslim women that is all you hear,Niquaab, Hijab,Niquaab ,Hijab sigh.That is what you get when surrounded by a purely material conception of the world in the age of publicity and fluffy slogans. As if all the spirituality of a Muslim woman was reduced to a piece of clothes.It has even become an object of fashion and exoticism and we've allowed this to happen. We may not realize it but that is what first comes to mind to any person out there ,and this is the message we are sending with these type of publicity nonsense.

When they look at a Muslim woman they are not interested in what her principles ,virtues, spirituality or belief is .The first thing is Hijab Niquaab ,and this is quite sad,yet we are eager to take the plunge like wheel hamsters.

A lot of you might not like what I say and would want to "excommunicate" me, but that is the truth and I stand by it.If you do not believe open your eyes at the societies you live in.This is not due to recent events I always thought like this.I don't care what Sarkozy,the liberal rich feminists leftists or other hypocrites say.They have to look what they did to women in their own backyard. In fact they open their mouthes without even knowing what a middle or poor class female life consists of.Since the late 60's they hardly have become representative of labor women,they are more like spoiled brats who theorize on matters they have lost touch with and fail to understand the dynamics of .

These are my humble words ,they are backed by evidence from the Quraan and Sunnah, as well,There is evidence that Niquaab is not fard as well and that Hijaab is enough.The majority of scholars from the four Madhabs also have held this view.The prophet Salla llahu Aleihi wassalaam always choose the easy way of two ,given the fact that the other was not forbidden.If it was an obligation the prophet who have told the woman to wear it as she came to ask him about Hajj in the presence of Al fadl as reported in Saheeh Bukhari .Make it simple people,if you wanna do Dawah and not scare people away especially women, by making Islam look like a very difficult religion to practice.

Keep it Musthaab but do not look down on those who wear it or not neither has any scholar this right when Allah swt and his messenger have not explicitly made it a Fard no matter what derived logic you use to say that "face covering is not required in Ihram therefore it must be obligatory outside of Ihram"!Well,Salaat is fard in Ihram it doesn't mean it is just Mubaha outside of ihraam, drinking water and eating also if they are halaal in ihram, it does not mean they are haraam outside Subhanallah.

Obviously Mustahab is a relative term for singular cases that are in different circumstances.In the west this niquaab story brings more trouble ,danger and attention than benefits and no, it does not prevent Fitna it adds to it!We have other priorities as Muslims who need not to be neglected like Ribaa based banks in "Muslim" countries, paper money,prostitution in both Western and "Muslim" countries...etc,it's time to move on from this.Allah swt won't let a soul bear more than it can.I won't say things for the sake of pleasing you.That pleasure is only worth to be longed for in the eyes of Allah swt.Feel free to disagree

Wallahu Allam Wa Allaa wa Ahkam.

[hayat84]

:salam2:
brother Justoneofamillion,I agree in part with you.how many times the womem struggled to reach their freedom?and how they reached it?putting of little by little their clothes,and with them their dignity.if now society wants to deny to muslim women the freedom to wear as Sunnah says,this is fault of it(the society).how many times I saw people wearing a scarf in winter and nothing but the eyes were shown?!if musilim niqabed women want to wear it,they should understand that nothing can harm them if they show how they are strong,because,as I said many times,if one day women will surrender and put off the niqab,another day there will be no hijabed woman on the earth.and I'm not talking about the our generation,but the one of our daughters.my motto is "NO FEAR".if women show their fear for a corrupted law,they will always be submitted to the power of the unjust people.

[samiha]

:wasalam:

While I will agree with the point that Muslim women are not solely comprised of what they decide to cover themselves with, and that there are many other issues that need to be addressed with them, and need to be spoken/taught about - the fact of the matter is, it's still a quite large aspect of our Deen, and so I can't agree with some of your conclusions.

Like this one:
Now if the purpose of wearing it is to appear discreet and not catchy in the west, those sister will only get more noticed from the surrounding society,in some countries it has even become an object of dissimulation ,anonymity and that is not good at all.

In the west this niquaab story brings more trouble ,danger and attention than benefits and no, it does not prevent Fitna it adds to it!We have other priorities as Muslims who need not to be neglected like Ribaa based banks in "Muslim" countries, paper money,prostitution in both Western and "Muslim" countries...etc,it's time to move on from this.Allah swt won't let a soul bear more than it can.I won't say things for the sake of pleasing you.That pleasure is only worth to be longed for in the eyes of Allah swt.Feel free to disagree

I do feel free to disagree. Because akh, you're mistaken when you describe its purpose. Looking to the Qur'aan it says:

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُل لِّأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَاء الْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِن جَلَابِيبِهِنَّ ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَن يُعْرَفْنَ فَلَا يُؤْذَيْنَ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا [33:59]

"O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies. That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed. And Allah is Ever Oft *!Forgiving, Most Merciful."

Other translations have, "... That will be better, so that they may be recognised and not annoyed."

So the purpose in itself is not to be 'hidden' but to be 'known' as free, respectable women. And like I was listening to a lecture by Bilal Philips he said it well when he gave the example (in my own words) - you have a woman who goes out in the street, all dressed up and fancy - she gets attention from people. Then you have the Muslimah, dressed in niqaab and goes out in the streets and she also gets attention from people. But these two attentions are not the same, they are completely different even if it attracts the eyes of people equally.

And the former is the type of attention to avoid, and the latter perfectly normal. Attention is NOT the problem, the type of attention is. And let me make it clear in this matter, that I've worn niqaab in the west, and in most places sure it brings lots of attention, but not half the hostility, trouble and 'danger' as you make out in your post. We cannot be weak just because a few people jeer, or say bad things - that's not the backbone of our Deen - now if you are living in a place where you will face physical harm or some such for broadcasting what is in a way an emblem of Islaam, then maybe that is the problem of location and a Muslim should think of moving from such a hostile place.

And from that I will have to say the Niqaab does not bring more harm than benefit. Wallaahi akhi, being a guy you might not even REALIZE a lot of these benefits. It's not even about the looks, it's not about the attention, it's about what niqaab stands for as a Muslimah (to that individual) and how it changes the person themselves. It's not just about others; niqaab changes the individual when they do it for Allaah, and I will challenge any Muslimah who says otherwise. It makes you approach the world in a different manner, direct your behavior in a different manner - it's more than just a cloth I agree, and it's more than just what makes a person 'good' - but it definitely has more weight than just a decision.

I acknowledge that you said you support and respect the sisters who wear it, so May Allaah reward you for that akhi, but do-rethink it not being as 'beneficial' because I'll tell you myself, it's not just about the outward effects.

These are my humble words ,they are backed by evidence from the Quraan and Sunnah, as well,There is evidence that Niquaab is not fard as well and that Hijaab is enough.The majority of scholars from the four Madhabs also have held this view.The prophet Salla llahu Aleihi wassalaam always choose the easy way of two ,given the fact that the other was not forbidden.If it was an obligation the prophet who have told the woman to wear it as she came to ask him about Hajj in the presence of Al fadl as reported in Saheeh Bukhari .Make it simple people,if you wanna do Dawah and not scare people away especially women, by making Islam look like a very difficult religion to practice.

Although I might not personally think the Niqaab is Fardh, that bolded/underlined statement is still wrong actually. Most of the scholars actually did require a woman to cover her face and hands. A quote from a separate forum would be good for this:

This article has quotes from scholars of all four madhhabs that require women to cover the face and hands:

هل وجه المرأة ليس بعورة هو قول الجمهور ؟ (http://www.saaid.net/female/h54.htm)

I should note that one could bring quotes from all the madhhabs that would seem to suggest the opposite, but at the least, this should be sufficient to show that the claim that the majority allow women to uncover hands and face is very much disputable.

As for the Hanbalis, I can say with absolute certainty that Imam Ahmad required women to cover completely even though a few Hanbali scholars may have said otherwise.

Second, I'm disappointed akhi, that you chose to say the words in red. Offended as well you could say. I would have been ready and willing to agree what there is more to Islaam and women than just niqaab, but when you bring to the plate saying, "If you would not want to scare people away, especially women by making Islam look like a very difficult religion to practice"

That was low. Niqaab is whatever you think it, an emblem of Islaam. A woman goes out in niqaab, there's no doubt first thing that's going to come to mind is "She's a Muslim" ... now if some people have misconceptions based on this - SURE it's a good thing to try to break them, I've done it many times when starting up a conversation with people who at first seemed wary. It's a da'wah in itself in many ways. It gets people curious of Islaam often times, and has made them look into Islaam.

Tell me - the Mothers of the Believers wore niqaab, they gave da'wah, taught their families, other women, participated in battles, etc all wearing niqaab. The free and respected women of that society wore niqaab. Did the Messenger of Allaah every turn to them and say, "Don't do his it's bad for da'wah" ... "It makes our religion look difficult to practice" ... la wallaahi, and never will I think it so, and never will I feel that by wearing it I am doing so.

I've never looked down on those who don't wear it, but you in this case certainly made out that those who do, even though you 'support' them, are doing the incorrect thing. Which is equally if not more so - wrong.

I won't 'excommunicate' you in the least akhi, but I will say it was in the very least unexpected to hear these things from you. It's one thing to hear these things from Non-Muslims... but from a Muslim, that hurts.

[justoneofmillion]

:wasalam:

While I will agree with the point that Muslim women are not solely comprised of what they decide to cover themselves with, and that there are many other issues that need to be addressed with them, and need to be spoken/taught about - the fact of the matter is, it's still a quite large aspect of our Deen, and so I can't agree with some of your conclusions.

:salam2:Hope you doing well inshallah,Please do have a look at the following article and site below.I am against any law that prevents Muslim women to wear what they want but I do not see how on earth can Muslim women have any impact and role of the broader society like the early women of the Salaaf did nowadays wearing Niquaab.This is obvious please do let us be honest about ,it is catchy in the west, it attracts the attention and looks of people.Sheikh al Albani rahmahou llah is of this opinion and he gives in my mind more convincing and detailed argumentation to his position in his book (Jilbaab al maraa al Muslima)than his opponents.As far as "Jilbaab" is concerned here is what he says"Like the previous misinterpretation, this interpretation has no basis linguistically. It is contrary to the interpretation of the leading scholars, past and present, who define the jilbaab as a garment which women drape over their head scarves (khimaar). Even Shaykh at-Tuwaijree himself narrated this interpretation from Ibn Mas‘ood and other Salafee scholars. Al-Baghawee mentioned it as the correct interpretation in his Tafseer (vol. 3, p. 518) saying, “It is the garment which a woman covers herself with worn above the dress (dir ‘) and the headscarf.” Ibn Hazm also said, “The jilbaab in the Arabic language in which the Messenger of Allaah () spoke to us is what covers the whole body and not just a part of it.” (vol. 3, p. 217). Al-Qurtubee declared this correct in his Tafseer and Ibn Katheer said, “It is the cloak worn above the headscarf.” (vol. 3, p. 518).

Here is a broader and more detailed analysis of what Jilbaab is:

http://www.muhajabah.com/jilbab.htm#sharia

It is true that the majority of Scholars have said it was Mustahab but not Fard I did make this nuance to be as fair as possible and decenter from my own opinion.If face and hands were to be considered Awra call whatever category you might put it into to the Husband Alone ,then why is it permissible to show them in front of other Mahrams,if it is still a source of Fitna?These are the few questions that I ask myself beside all the evidence proving they are not or How can they even be "recognized" as good women by what criteria, if people do not even know and can not know who they are?.Wa lahu Allam.I personally do not like people starring at my woman all the time.I would get in trouble fighting people everyday you kidding me..,that when am with her,when am not I can not stand the idea of anybody male or female looking down at her or making fun of her or make her feel discomfort in anyway, in Muslim countries it would be a different story.I will expand when I have more time inshallah on why I think it is not a way of preventing Fitna and may actually produce the opposite effect according to what I witness by my own experience in western societies.Let us start with this first,if you allow.Inshallah


Examining the Dalils for Niqab

The dalils for niqab are presented here (they are taken from Niqaab in Light of Quran and Sahih Hadith), displayed in red. My comments have been interleaved and appear in black. Some additional points are made at the end of the niqab dalils.

The Niqaab in light of the Holy Quran and Sahih Hadith

Examining the Quran

The text presented here as the Quran does not represent a very literal translation of the Quran. Instead, the translator has inserted his commentary in parenthetical notes. This is very unfortunate, as it gives a misleading idea of what the Arabic text of the Quran revealed by Allah SWT actually says. Moreover, this could not be done in the Arabic text - can you imagine inserting your own words in the Quran?!

From the Quran.....(This tafseer is Agreed upon by Ibn Kathir, Al-Qurtabi and At-Tabari)

The Noble Qur'an ........

A) Surah Al-Ahzaab, Verse #59

‘O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks ("Jalabib") veils all over their bodies (screen themselves completely except the eyes or one eye to see the way Tafseer Al-Qurtabi) that is most convenient that they should be known (as such) and not molested: and Allah is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful."

The Arabic text of this ayah is, "Ya ayyuha an-Nabi, qul li azwajika wa banatika wa nisa al-muminin yudnina alayhinna min jalabib hinna; dhalika adna an yu'rafna fa laa yu'dhayn. Wa kana Allahu Ghafur ar-Rahim", which literally translates as, "O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (jalabib) close around themselves; that is better that they are recognized and not annoyed. And God is Most Forgiving, Merciful". There are actually a number of opinions given in the tafsir about what "draw their jalabib close around themselves" means. Among these are, "she should bring the jilbab close to her face without covering it" (reported by ibn Abbas in the tafsir of Tabari, and graded as sahih by Shaykh Albani), and, "Others believe that the women have been directed to secure their jalabib firmly on their foreheads" (commentary of Tabari in his tafsir of this ayah). Thus we can see that it is a valid opinion that the jilbab does not have to cover the face.

Note: Because there is a very strong case to be made that the jilbab at the time of revelation of this ayah did cover the face, I have also written an essay called What is the Final Rule on Hijab? which accepts that Surah al-Ahzab ayah 59 does command covering the face but argues that niqab is still not fard.

B) Surah An-Nur, Verses #30 and #31

‘And Say to the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent (like both eyes for necessity to see the way, or outer palms of hands or one eye or dress like veil, gloves, head cover, apron), and to draw their veils all over Juyubihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms)

The "translation" of this ayah is particularly poor. The Arabic text is, "Wa qul li al-muminat yaghdudna min absarihinna wa yahfazna furujahunna wa laa yubdina zenatahunna illa maa zahara min haa wal-yadribna bi khumurihinna alaa juyub hinna". This is properly translated as, "And say to the faithful women to lower their gazes, and to guard their private parts, and not to display their adornment except what is apparent of it, and to extend their khumur to cover their juyub". First, the word "juyub". This is the plural of the word "jayb", which means "bosom". The word is used in Arabic to refer to the breastpocket of a shirt, and to a certain type of mathematical curve. As well, Surah al-Qasas ayah 32 describes Moses as putting his hand in his "jayb", and this means his breast, not his "body, face, neck and bosom"!!! Whoever has translated "juyub" as "bodies, faces, necks, and bosoms" does not understand the Arabic language very well! To read about the mathematics, see The Origin of the Word Sine. To see an image of this curve, click here. Let's just say that, for most people, the image should remove any doubt over what part of a woman's body a "jayb" is! So I'm sorry whoever wrote this, "juyub" means "bosoms". There is no way to get the meaning of "bodies" or "faces" out of it, period. There is also the question of the meaning of "except what is apparent of it". The interpretation inserted here basically is that it refers to the outer surface of the garments that a woman customarily wears. This is the opinion of the Sahabi, ibn Masud (rAa). But it is hardly the only opinion! Shaykh Yusuf Qaradawi has provided an excellent survey of the opinions on this subject, which can be found in his book The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam. A summary is that of the Sahaba, Aisha Umm al-Muminin (rAa), ibn Abbas (rAa), Anas ibn Malik (rAa), and Miswar ibn Makhrama (rAa), and of the Tabi'un, Sa'id ibn Jubair (rAa), Ata (rAa), Qatada (rAa), al-Dahhak (rAa), Mujahid (rAa), and al-Hasan (rAa) all said that the meaning of "what is apparent of it" is "the face and hands". This is in fact the majority position on the meaning of this verse. The commentators on the Quran Tabari, Razi, Zamakhshari, and Qurtubi have all taken this position. Clearly then, this ayah of the Quran has not been taken by most scholars to command niqab.

Note: I have written an essay on this ayah, which is at A Study of Surah an-Nur ayah 31.

Examining the hadiths

Here are some hadiths that have been presented claiming that they prove niqab is fard. Each of the hadiths is analyzed in turn.

From the Hadith.....

A) Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Hadith # 282

Narrated Safiya bint Shaiba (Radhiallaahu anha) "Aisha (Radhiallaahu anha) used to say: "When (the Verse): "They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms," was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and covered their faces with the cut pieces.

The Arabic text that the translator has rendered "covered their faces with the cut pieces" is "ikhtamarna bi ha" or "made khimars from it". The hadith therefore means that the women tore their sheets and made khimars from the cut pieces. The word "faces" does not even appear in the Arabic. So far all we know is that when Surah an-Nur ayah 31 commanded women to wear the khimar, they did so. This hadith does not indicate by itself what that khimar is.

B) Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Hadith # 368

Narrated 'Aisha (Radhiallaahu anha) Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) used to offer the Fajr prayer and some believing women covered with their veiling sheets used to attend the Fajr prayer with him and then they would return to their homes unrecognized . Shaikh Ibn Uthaimin in tafseer of this hadith explains "This hadith makes it clear that the Islamic dress is concealing of the entire body as explained in this hadith. Only with the complete cover including the face and hands can a woman not be recognized. This was the understanding and practice of the Sahaba and they were the best of group, the noblest in the sight of Allah (swt) with the most complete Imaan and noblest of characters. so if the practice of the women of the sahaba was to wear the complete veil then how can we deviate from their path? (Ibn Uthaimin in the book "Hijaab" page #12 and 13)

The same story of the women going out to salat al-fajr is told in several other hadiths in Bukhari and Muslim. In these, the Arabic text says clearly that they were "unrecognized due to the darkness". It does not say that they were unrecognized due to their veiling. In fact we can't tell just from this hadith whether or not the veiling sheets (murut) cover the faces. To see the Arabic text of the hadith with the indicated phrase underlined.

http://www.muhajabah.com/images/darknesshadith.jpg

. Also, as noted above, there are some opinions that the jilbab does not have to cover the face.

C) Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 1, Book 4, Hadith # 148

Narrated 'Aisha (Radhiallaahu anha): The wives of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqia at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. 'Umar used to say to the Prophet "Let your wives be veiled," but Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) did not do so. One night Sauda bint Zam'a the wife of the Prophet went out at 'Isha' time and she was a tall lady. 'Umar addressed her and said, "I have recognized you, O Sauda." He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verses of Al-Hijab (the observing of veils by the Muslim women) may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of "Al-Hijab" (A complete body cover excluding the eyes).

The "verse of al-hijab" mentioned in this hadith is Surah al-Ahzab ayah 53, which is addressed to Ummahat al-Muminin (rAa). The command does not apply to ordinary Muslim women. The claim that this ayah commands "the observing of veils by Muslim women" has been inserted by the translator and does not appear in the Arabic text.

D) Tirmidhi with a SAHIH chain reports...

"Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) said “All of a woman is ‘awrah.” (Shaikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid quotes this hadith narrated by Tirmidhi with a sahih isnaad and says this is a direct hadith from Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam ) and has made it clear that a woman must cover everything including the face and hands!)

The issue of the awra is in fact quite complicated. A woman has two kinds of awra. The first, which is sometimes called the "hard awra", is from the upper chest to the knee or below. This cannot be seen by anybody but her husband. The second kind of awra is sometimes called the "soft awra", and it is everything that cannot be seen by non-mahram men. Obviously, the Tirmidhi hadith cannot be talking about the hard awra, or it would mean that a woman would have to wear niqab even around her brothers and father because they cannot see her hard awra. Instead, the hadith must be taken to mean that the woman is "soft awra". It is interesting to see what some notable scholars have said about the extent of the soft awra. Imam ibn Qudama, who wrote the definitive book of Hanbali fiqh, the Mughni, said that, "the face and hands constitute a specific exemption to the general meaning of this hadith". Imam Tabari, who wrote a great tafsir of the Quran, said, "The strongest and most accurate view is that which says the exemption [in 24:31 for "what is apparent thereof"] refers to the face and the hands up to the wrist. Also included are kohl, rings, bracelets, and makeup. We say that this is the strongest and most accurate opinion because all scholars are unanimous that everyone who needs to pray must cover the awra in his or her prayer. A woman may reveal the face and the hands in her prayer, while she must cover the rest of her body. What is not awra is not haram to be revealed". Fakhr ad-Din Razi, who also wrote a great tafsir of the Quran, said, "Since the showing of the face and hands is necessary, the jurists had no choice but to agree that they are not awra". Here we have three great scholars saying that the face and the hands are not awra and that they consitute "a specific exemption to the general meaning of this hadith".

E) Abu Dawood Book 14, Hadith # 2482

Narrated Thabit ibn Qays (Radhiallaahu anhu): A woman called Umm Khallad came to the Prophet (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) while she was veiled. She was searching for her son who had been killed (in the battle) Some of the Companions of the Prophet (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) said to her: You have come here asking for your son while veiling your face? She said: If I am afflicted with the loss of my son, I shall not suffer the loss of my modesty. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) said: You will get the reward of two martyrs for your son. She asked: Why is that so, oh Prophet of Allah? He replied: Because the people of the Book have killed him.

This hadith does indeed show Umm Khallad (rAa) wearing niqab, but it is interesting that the Sahaba (rAa) marveled at her doing so. Would they have been marveling if she just did what was commanded for her? More generally, we can say that this hadith proves that women did wear niqab, but they may have been doing so because it is mustahabb, so there needs to be some other evidence to make it fard.

F) Abu Dawood Book 32, Hadith # 4090

Narrated Umm Salamah, Ummul Mu'minin (Radhiallaahu anha): When the verse "That they should cast their outer garments over their persons" was revealed, the women of Ansar came out as if they had crows over their heads by wearing outer garments.

In this hadith the women came out in their new jilbabs. The description "like they had crows on their heads" does not necessarily mean that their faces were covered. All it sounds like is that their heads were covered. This is another opinion (in addition to the ones listed under Surah al-Ahzab ayah 59 above) that the jilbab does not necessarily have to cover the face.

G) Abu Dawood Book 32, Hadith # 4091

Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin (Radhiallaahu anha) "May Allah have mercy on the early immigrant women. When the verse "That they should draw their veils over their bosoms" was revealed, they tore their thick outer garments and made veils from them. Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalanee, who is known as Ameer Al-Mu'mineen in the field of Hadith, said that the phrase, "covered themselves", in the above Hadith means that they "covered their faces". [Fath Al-Bari].

This is the same as the hadith in part A above, except that the translator has rendered the Arabic more accurately as "made veils". As stated above, the text of this hadith does not mention anything about covering the face. Ibn Hajar had to read this in to make it say that.

H) Imaam Malik's MUWATTA Book 20 Hadith # 20.5.16

Yahya related to me from Malik from Hisham ibn Urwa that Fatima bint al-Mundhir (Radhiallaahu anha) said, "We used to veil our faces when we were in Ihram in the company of Asma bint Abi Bakr As-Siddiq (Radhiallaahu anha). "This again proves that not only the wives of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) wore the Niqaab and that even though in Ihram women are not supposed to wear Niqaab but if men are there they still have to cover the face.

The issue of niqab and ihram is in fact one of the big controversies, and a problem for those who say that niqab is fard. It is very clear that the Prophet (sAas) said that a woman in ihram must not wear either a niqab or gloves. Nobody has ever given a convincing explanation of why in the world the Prophet (sAas) said this in the first place if it were fard to cover the face. This is especially true because the obligatory duties of the hajj must be done in public, and in general there are very large crowds around. If a woman is supposed to cover her face anyway around non-mahram men, she really has to cover it at all times on the hajj and that is just the same as wearing niqab. Instead, the Prophet (sAas) has clearly commanded that a woman should have an uncovered face in public while in ihram; that's the only thing that makes sense. As for Asma (rAa), it appears that she followed the course of Ummahat al-Muminin (rAa), which is discussed in the next hadith. That she did so does not prove that doing so is fard, merely that it is halal.

I) Abu Dawood Book 10, Hadith # 1829

Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin: (Radhiallaahu anha) who said, "The riders would pass us while we were with the Messenger of Allah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam). When they got close to us, we would draw our outer cloak from our heads over our faces. When they passed by, we would uncover our faces.

Recorded by Ahmad, Abu Dawood and Ibn Majah, Narrated 'Aisha. [In his work Jilbab al-Marah al-Muslimah, al-Albani states (p. 108) that it is hasan due to corroborating evidence. Also, in a narration from Asma {who was not the wife of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam)}, Asma also covered her face at all times in front of men.] Shaikh Ibn Uthaimin in his tafseer of this hadith explains "This hadith indicates the compulsion of the concealing of the faces as an order of Shariah, because during the Ihram it is "wajib" (compulsory) NOT to wear the Niqaab. So if it was only mustahab (recommended) to cover the face then Aisha and Asma (Radhiallaahu anha) would have taken the wajib over the mustahab. It is well known by the Ullima that a wajib can only be left because of something that is also wajib or fardh. So Aisha and Asma (Radhiallaahu anha) covering the face even in Ihram in the presence of strange (ghairMahraam) men shows that they understood this to be an act that was wajib or fardh or they would not have covered the face in Ihraam.

Here is the description of Aisha Umm al-Muminin (rAa) in ihram. When it comes to Ummahat al-Muminin (rAa) it is fard for them to wear niqab (from Surah al-Ahzab ayah 53). Thus when presented with the Prophet's (sAas) command for bare faces, they found the best compromise solution they could, which was to cover their faces only when non-mahram men were around, and then to uncover them again when the men went away. It is one thing for the Prophet (sAas) to ask nine women (i.e., his wives) to do this, another thing for him to demand that all women at all times through history must do so. Why not just keep silent and let the women wear their niqabs? Also note that the author claims that the women disobeyed the command of the Prophet (sAas) in order to obey the Quran - since when would the Prophet (sAas) be giving a command that contradicts the Quran?????? It is strange how this glaring contradiction escapes those who want to argue that niqab is fard. If the Prophet (sAas) told women to unveil their faces in public, clearly this is a halal action, period.

J) Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 7, Book 72, Hadith # 715

Narrated 'Ikrima (Radhiallaahu anhu) narrates "Rifa'a divorced his wife whereupon 'AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. 'Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil." It is a very long hadith but the point is the women of Sahaba wore the full veil.

The wife of Rifa'a was wearing a green khimar. This is the same point that has been made above - this hadith merely shows a woman obeying the command in Surah an-Nur ayah 31 to wear a khimar, it does not say anything in itself to indicate that the khimar must cover the face. It is interesting to look at the full text of this hadith, which can be found here. After having described the wife of Rifa'a as wearing a green khimar, Aisha (rAa) says to the Prophet (sAas) "Look! Her skin is as green as her clothes". If the woman were wearing "the full veil" how could any of her skin be visible for the Prophet (sAas) to look at? In any case, at most her face or her hands could be showing. It seems most likely that it was her face that was green. If this is true, then the khimar definitely does not cover the face.

K) Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Hadith # 347

Narrated Um 'Atiya (Radhiallaahu anha) We were ordered (by Rasulullah '(Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) to bring out our menstruating women and veiled women in the religious gatherings and invocation of Muslims on the two 'Eid festivals. These menstruating women were to keep away from their Musalla. A woman asked, "O Allah's Apostle ' What about one who does not have a veil (the veil is the complete cover with only one eye or two eyes showing)?" He said, "Let her share the veil of her companion." Shaikh Ibn Uthaimin in tafseer of this hadith explained "This hadith proves that the general norm amongst the women of the Sahaba (Radhiallaahu anhuma) was that no woman would go out of her home without a cloak, fully concealed and if she did not posses a veil, then it was not possible for her to go out. it was for this reason that when Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) ordered them to go to the Place for Eid Salah, they mentioned this hindrance. As a result Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) said that someone should lend her a veil, but did not say they could go out without it. If Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) did not allow women to go to a place like the Eid Salah, which has been ordered by Shariah for women and men alike, then how can people let women to out to market places and shopping centers without where there is open intermingling of the sexes, without a veil. (by Shaikh Ibn Uthaimin in the book "Hijaab" page # 11)

This hadith concerns the wearing of the jilbab. The author of the article has stated correctly that the hadith proves that wearing the jilbab is indeed fard (which for some reason many sisters deny; see Evidences for Jilbab for more proof it is fard) but it does not in fact describe anywhere in it whether or not the jilbab is to cover the face. This is the same point made previously about the khimar and I have already said that there are some opinions that the jilbab does not necessarily have to cover the face.

L) Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 8, Book 76, Hadith # 572

In the end of this very long hadith it quotes Anas (Radhiallaahu anho) rates from Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) "and if one of the women of Paradise looked at the earth, she would fill the whole space between them (the earth and the heaven) with light, and would fill whatever is in between them, with perfume, and the veil of her face is better than the whole world and whatever is in it." This show that even the women of Junnah have veils and the word veil is what covers the face (niqaab).

Here the women of Jannah (i.e., the houris) are wearing niqabs. I really have no idea why this is included as a dalil. That the houris wear niqab does not say anything about whether it is fard for human women to do so, although it does indicate that niqab is mustahabb and characteristic of the best of women. Note that one does not usually imagine the houris as niqabis!!!

M) Abu Dawood Book 33, Hadith # 4154, Agreed upon by Nasai

Aisha(Radhiallaahu anha) narrates that on one occasion a female Muslim wanted to give a letter to the Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam), the letter was delivered to the Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) from behind a curtain.

Note: Quoted in the famous book Mishkaat. Here the Mufasereen of hadith have explained that the hadith where women came up to Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) face to face were before the ayah "And when you ask (his wives) for anything you want, ask them from behind a screen, that is purer for your hearts and for their hearts." (Surah AlaAhzab ayah # 53) And this hadith proves this order is for the whole Ummah not just for the wives of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam)!

It is very interesting to look up the complete text of this hadith, which can be found here. In the last part of it, the Prophet (sAas) commands the woman to wear henna on her hands in order to distinguish them from men's hands. I wonder why this part of the hadith has not been quoted! It seems to be clear proof that women can display their hands in public. In any case, the hadith merely shows that it is halal for all women to use the screen, not that it is fard.

N) Abu Dawood Book 2, Hadith # 0641

Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin (Radhiallaahu anha) "Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) said "Allah does not accept the prayer of a woman who has reached puberty unless she wears a veil."

Here women are commanded to wear a khimar for salat, even when alone. Now it gets interesting. The scholars are unanimous that a woman in private salat may uncover her face and her hands (this has been stated above by Imam Tabari). The khimar must in fact be a headscarf and not a niqab. Because if the khimar was a niqab, and the Prophet (sAas) has commanded women to wear khimars in salat, then they would of necessity be covering their faces in salat, but they do not do so. And if the khimar is only a headscarf, then we can go back to the hadith mentioned above (A and G) and say that when Surah an-Nur ayah 31 was revealed the women tore their sheets and made headscarves not niqabs out of the cut pieces. The wife of Rifa'a was wearing a green headscarf, not "the full veil", which makes it clear why her face was visible (see hadith J above).

O) Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 9, Book 89, Hadith # 293

Narrated 'Aisha (Radhiallaahu anha) Utba bin Abi Waqqas said to his brother Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas, "The son of the slave girl of Zam'a is from me, so take him into your custody." So in the year of Conquest of Mecca, Sa'd took him and said. (This is) my brother's son whom my brother has asked me to take into my custody." 'Abd bin Zam'a got up before him and said, (He is) my brother and the son of the slave girl of my father, and was born on my father's bed." So they both submitted their case before Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam). Sa'd said, "O Allah's Apostle! This boy is the son of my brother and he entrusted him to me." 'Abd bin Zam'a said, "This boy is my brother and the son of the slave girl of my father, and was born on the bed of my father." Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) said, "The boy is for you, O 'Abd bin Zam'a!" Then Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) further said, "The child is for the owner of the bed, and the stone is for the adulterer," Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) then said to Sauda bint Zam'a, "Veil (screen) yourself before him," when he saw the child's resemblance to 'Utba. The boy did not see her again till he met Allah. note: This hadith proves Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) did infact order the veil to be observed.

Sawda bint Zam'a (rAa) is one of the wives of the Prophet (sAas)!!! That the Prophet (sAas) commanded her to use the screen only confirms that Ummahat al-Muminin (rAa) did so in obedience to Surah al-Ahzab ayah 53. This hadith does not say anything about ordinary Muslim women.

P) Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 7, Book 65, Hadith # 375

Narrated Anas (Radhiallaahu anhu) I know (about) the Hijab (the order of veiling of women) more than anybody else. Ubai bin Ka'b used to ask me about it. Allah's Apostle became the bridegroom of Zainab bint Jahsh whom he married at Medina. After the sun had risen high in the sky, the Prophet invited the people to a meal. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) remained sitting and some people remained sitting with him after the other guests had left. Then Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) got up and went away, and I too, followed him till he reached the door of 'Aisha's room. Then he thought that the people must have left the place by then, so he returned and I also returned with him. Behold, the people were still sitting at their places. So he went back again for the second time, and I went along with him too. When we reached the door of 'Aisha's room, he returned and I also returned with him to see that the people had left. Thereupon Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) hung a curtain between me and him and the Verse regarding the order for (veiling of women) Hijab was revealed.

This is also about Surah al-Ahzab ayah 53. The story is also told in Bukhari Book 60 #315, in which the specific ayah of the Quran Surah al-Ahzab ayah 53 is quoted in the text of the hadith. This ayah applies only to Ummahat al-Muminin (rAa). The phrase "veiling order for women" does not appear in the Arabic text.

Q) Abu Dawood Book 32, hadith # 4100

Narrated Umm Salamah, Ummul Mu'minin (Radhiallaahu anha): I was with Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) while Maymunah was with him. Then Ibn Umm Maktum came. This happened when we were ordered to observe veil. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) said: Observe veil from him. We asked: oh Rasulullah! is he not blind? He can neither see us nor recognize us. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu alayhi Wasallam) said: Are both of you blind? Do you not see him?

This hadith is even more interesting when you look at the full text of it, which can be found here. In this part, the hadith collector Abu Dawud comments that there is also a hadith that Fatima bint Qays (rAa) spent her iddat with ibn Umm Maktum (rAa). Abu Dawud concludes that Ummahat al-Muminin (rAa) must have a different rule than ordinary Muslim women like Fatima (rAa). This is certainly true. It is Surah al-Ahzab ayah 53 that is the special rule for Ummahat al-Muminin (rAa). I wonder why Abu Dawud's commentary on this hadith has not been quoted!



Summary

To summarize, 17 hadiths have been presented as dalils. Of these 4 (mentioned in points A, G, J, and N) refer to the khimar and it has been proved that the khimar is not a niqab. Therefore, these 4 hadiths are not even about niqab at all.

Note: I have made a page giving a more detailed explanation of why the khimar is not a niqab. See What is the Khimar?. This essay contains some of the same information found in my essay A Study of Surah an-Nur ayah 31 but focuses on the single issue of the khimar.

Of the 13 hadiths that remain after this, another 5 hadiths (mentioned in points C, I, O, P, and Q) are only about Ummahat al-Muminin (rAa) and it has been proved that the screen commanded for Ummahat al-Muminin (rAa) in Surah al-Ahzab ayah 53 is not an obligation for ordinary Muslim women. So these hadiths do not say anything about niqab for ordinary Muslim women, either. Along similar lines 1 of the hadiths (mentioned in point L) says that houris wear niqab but does not say anything about whether human women need to.

Of the 7 hadiths that remain once those have been removed from consideration, 3 hadiths (mentioned in points B, F, and K) mention the jilbab but they do not provide independent proof of whether the jilbab should cover the face. In fact, one (point F) seems to mention only the covering of the head. In other words, if it is proved that the jilbab does not need to cover the face, these hadiths are consistent with that as well. And as was shown in the Quran section, it is clear that some scholars hold that the jilbab does not need to cover the face, so that does not prove it either.

Note: In case the argument that the jilbab does not necessarily cover the face is not accepted, I have also written an essay, What is the Final Rule on Hijab? that argues for the display of the face and hands while assuming that Surah al-Ahzab ayah 59 does indicate that the face should be covered.

This leaves 4 hadiths. Regarding the hadith "A woman is awra" (point D), it has been discussed above and it is clear that many scholars have interpreted the face and hands to be an exemption to the meaning of the hadith. Therefore this is an acceptable position to follow, and the hadith does not necessarily command niqab.

Of the total of 17 hadiths presented, therefore, only 3 (mentioned in points E, H, and M) clearly and unambiguously show women wearing niqab or screening themselves. And these hadiths do not contain in themselves any command made by the Prophet (sAas) for niqab, nor any mention of a Quranic ayah with a command for niqab. They show that niqab is halal, and in fact they show that it is mustahabb and sunna. But they do not by themselves show that niqab is fard.



Did the Prophet allow women to display their faces and hands?

Having looked at the hadiths that are presented to claim that niqab is fard, let us now look at some hadiths that point to the opposite conclusion:

a) Bukhari Book 54 #515. Narrated Sa'd bin Abu Waqqas: Once Umar asked leave to see Allah's Apostle, in whose company there were some Qurayshi women, who were talking to him and asking him for more financial support, raising their voices. When Umar asked permission to enter, the women quickly screened themselves (fa badirna al-hijab). When Allah's Apostle admitted Umar, Allah's Apostle was smiling. Umar said, "O Allah's Apostle! May Allah keep you happy always!". Allah's Apostle said, "I am astonished at these women here with me. As soon as they heard your voice, they quickly screened themselves". Umar said, "O Allah's Apostle! You have more right to be feared by them". Then he addressed (the women) saying, "O enemies of yourselves! Do you fear me and not Allah's Apostle?" They replied, "Yes, for you are a fearful and fierce man as compared to Allah's Apostle". On that Allah's Apostle said (to Umar), "By Him in Whose hands my life is, when satan sees you taking a path, he takes a path other than yours".

COMMENT: Here we see that the women were not wearing niqab when they were in front of the Prophet (sAas), since they had to put it on when Umar (rAa) entered. How could it be fard then?? Instead, this is like Umm Khallad (rAa) or Asma (rAa), it merely shows that niqab is mustahabb and sunna. Surah al-Ahzab ayah 59 was revealed in Dhu'l-Qida 5 A.H. and Surah an-Nur ayah 31 in Shawwal 6 A.H., whereas this hadith seems to be taking place after the conquest of Mecca in Ramadan 8 A.H., after which the women of Quraysh (along with the men) all accepted Islam.

b) Bukhari Book 74 #247. Narrated Abdullah bin Abbas: Al-Fadl bin Abbas rode behind the Prophet as his companion rider on the back portion of his she-camel on the Day of Nahr [on the Farewell Hajj], and Al-Fadl was a handsome man. The Prophet stopped to give people verdicts. In the meantime, a beautiful woman from the tribe of Khath'am came, asking the verdict of Allah's Apostle. Al-Fadl started looking at her as her beauty attracted him. The Prophet looked back while Al-Fadl was looking at her; so the Prophet held out his hand backwards and caught the chin of Al-Fadl and turned his face to the other side in order that he should not gaze at her. She said, "O Allah's Apostle! The obligation of performing hajj enjoined by Allah on His worshipers has become due (compulsory) on my father, who is an old man and who cannot sit firmly on the riding animal. Will it be sufficient that I perform hajj on his behalf?". He said, "Yes".

COMMENT: According to those who hold that niqab is fard, even when a woman is in ihram (as this woman was) she must cover her face when she comes in front of non-mahram men. The woman of Khath'am had her face uncovered, so that the two men could clearly see that she was beautiful (and apparently the narrator ibn Abbas rAa could as well). Why did the Prophet (sAas) not admonish the woman and tell her to cover her face when she came in front of them? The answer is obvious: it is perfectly halal for a woman to have an uncovered face.

c) Muslim Book 4 #1926. Jabir ibn Abdullah reported: I observed prayer with the Messenger of Allah on the Eid day. He commenced with prayer before the sermon, without adhan or iqama. He then stood up leaning on Bilal and he commanded (them) to be on guard (against evil for the sake of) Allah and he exhorted (them) on obedience to Him, and he preached to the people and admonished them. He then walked on till he came to the women and preached to them and admonished them and encouraged them to give alms, for most of them are the fuel for Hell. A woman having a dark spot on her cheek stood up and said, "Why is it so, Messenger of Allah?". He said, "For you grumble often and show ingratitude to your spouses". And they began to give alms out of their ornaments such as their earrings and rings, which they threw in the cloak of Bilal.

COMMENT: How did the narrator know that the woman had a dark spot on her cheek unless her face was uncovered?

d) Ibn Abbas said: A beautiful woman, from among the most beautiful of women, used to pray behind the Prophet. Some of the people used to go to pray in the first row to ensure they would not be able to see her. Others would pray in the last row of the men, and they would look from underneath their armpits to see her. Because of this act, in regard to her, Allah revealed, "Verily We know the eager among you to be first, and verily We know the eager among you to be behind" (Surah al-Hijr ayah 24) -- this hadith is found in ibn Majah, Abu Dawud, Tayalisi, Baihaqi, Ahmad, Tirmidhi, and Nasai and it is judged SAHIH by Albani. He includes it as #3472 in his Silsilat al-Ahadith as-Sahih

COMMENT: This hadith only makes sense if the woman's face was uncovered. Why did Allah SWT not reveal a command for niqab, if niqab is fard to prevent such situations? Instead, the Prophet (sAas) merely admonished the men, who are commanded to lower their gazes in Surah an-Nur ayah 30 and were not doing so.

COMMENT: This hadith only makes sense if the woman's face was uncovered. Why did Allah SWT not reveal a command for niqab, if niqab is fard to prevent such situations? Instead, the Prophet (sAas) merely admonished the men, who are commanded to lower their gazes in Surah an-Nur ayah 30 and were not doing so.

Conclusion

From these four hadiths we can clearly see that even as late as Dhu'l-Hijja 10 A.H. (a few months before the death of the Prophet sAas) it was halal for women to have uncovered faces. When they came in front of the Prophet (sAas) that way, he allowed it, and he did not command them to wear niqab. If the Prophet understood the Quran to mean that women can display their faces and hands, that is the interpretation we should follow.
http://www.muhajabah.com/niqabdalils.htm

[justoneofmillion]

A majority of scholars throughout history have agreed that women may display their faces and hands. This includes scholars from all the major legal schools (madhahib). Some scholars who have held this opinion are Imams Jassas, Qurtubi, Razi, ibn Qudama, Tabari, Zamakhshari, and Nawawi.

"As for the free woman, her ‘awrah is her whole body except the face and the two hands, for Allah Most High said: “…they should not display their beauty and ornaments excepts what ( must ordinarily ) appear thereof…” ( Surah al-Nur, 24:31) . Ibn ‘Abbas said: “That which must appear is the face and the two hands. And the Prophet forbade the woman in ihtam to put on the face veil or gloves. If the face and two hands were part of ‘awrah, he would not have forbidden them to cover them. At the same time, she may need to uncover them for such day to day matters as buying, selling, giving, talking, etc. So these two areas were made exceptions from ‘awrah.”

The ‘awrah of the free woman is her whole body except the face and the two hands up to the wrist. Some of or Khurasan scholars are of the view that the soles of the feet are not ‘awrah. Al-Muzani, one of the great students of al-Shafi, said: “The two feet are not ‘awrah either.” ………I mentioned what is well established of the Shafi’i school, that the ‘awrah of the woman is verything except the face and the two hands up to the wrists. Malik is of the same view and so are other group scholars. This is one of the views of ibn Hanbal, Abu Hanifah, al-Thawri and al-Muzani also include the two feet as being excepted from ‘awrah."

(Imam An Nawawi's Majmuu Sharh al-Muhaththab, vol.3 , p.173)



[QUOTE]Opinions of scholars in favor of displaying the face and hands





Sahaba and Tabi'un (rAa)

Of the Sahaba, those who supported the display of the face and hands are: Aisha Umm al-Muminin (rAa), ibn Abbas (rAa), Anas ibn Malik (rAa), and Miswar ibn Makhrama (rAa).

Of the Tabi'un, those who supported the display of the face and hands are: Sa'id ibn Jubayr (rAa), Ata (rAa), Qatada (rAa), al-Dahhak (rAa), Mujahid (rAa), and al-Hasan (rAa).



Scholars from the major legal schools (madhahib)

Imam Abu Bakr Jassas, Hanafi scholar: "Our scholars say that this [exemption] denotes the woman's face and hands"

Imam Abu Abdullah Qurtubi, Maliki scholar: "Since the normal case is that a woman�s face and hands are revealed by the force of habit and for worship, as this is required in salat and hajj, then it is appropriate to say that the exemption [in 24:31] applies to these"

Imam Fakhr ad-Din Razi, Shafi'i scholar: "Since the showing of the face and hands is necessary, the jurists had no choice but to agree that they are not awra"

Imam Ahmad ibn Qudama, Hanbali scholar: "[I prefer this opinion] because necessity demands that the face should be uncovered for buying and selling, and the hands should be uncovered for giving and taking"

Imam Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm, Zahiri scholar: "The part of the woman's body which has to be concealed is the whole of it except her face and her hands"



Other great scholars

Imam Abu Jafar Tabari, author of a tafsir of the Quran: "The strongest and most accurate view is that which says that the exemption [in 24:31] refers to the face and the hands up to the wrist. Also included are kohl, rings, bracelets, and makeup. We say that this is the strongest and most accurate opinion because all scholars are unanimous that everyone who needs to pray must cover the awra in his or her salat. A woman may reveal the face and the hands in her salat, while she must cover the rest of her body. What is not awra is not haram to be revealed"

Imam Abu'l-Qasim Zamakhshari, author of another tafsir: "Why is the woman permitted to display 'what is apparent of it'? Because to conceal that would cause her inconvenience. A woman is forced to deal in commodities with her hands. She is compelled by genuine need to expose her face especially at the times of giving evidence, litigating in court, and marriage. She is compelled to walk the streets and expose her feet, especially poor women. This is the meaning of 'illa maa zahara min ha', that is, what the situations of ordinary life compel her to expose"

Imam Nawawi, author of a fiqh guide: "Women's clothing must cover at least the entire body excepting the hands and face"



Consensus of the scholars

Imam Abu'l-Walid ibn Rushd (d. 595AH/1198CE): "As for the third issue - that is, the extent to which a woman should cover herself - is concerned, most of the scholars are of the opinion that her whole body, except her face and hands, should be covered"

Imam Abu Abdullah Qurtubi (d. 671AH/1273CE): "The consensus of the Muslims is that all of a woman [is awra] except her face and hands, but some disagree about these two"



Modern-day scholars

Shaykh Yusuf Qaradawi, perhaps one of the most widely famous scholars of today, is a strong supporter of the face-and-hands opinion. He discusses why in great detail in his book The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam.

Shaykh Muhammad Nasiruddin Albani, probably one of the greatest muhaddithun of this century and a highly-respected salafi scholar, is also a strong supporter of the face-and-hands opinion. This is based on his thorough examination of the hadiths and the opinions of the scholars. He discusses his opinion at The Face Veil Is Not Obligatory.http://www.islamicweb.com/beliefs/women/albani_niqab.htm



More opinions of scholars in favor of displaying the face and hands may be found at About Displaying the Face and Hands and More About Displaying the Face and Hands




Q690 Time and again readers have asked you how a Muslim woman should be dressed in public and your answer has always been that it is proper for her not to cover her face. My wife holds the opposite view. She has drawn my attention to a report by Lady Aisha, the Prophet's wife who says in her account of the story of falsehood, "I veiled my face with my head-cover at once..." May I ask why did she cover her face? Was it in obedience to a divine order, or because of her modesty or fright, or because that covering was a local tradition? You stated that a Muslim woman may appear in public without covering her face. Could you, then, please explain the meaning of Verse 59 in Surah 33. Please explain the difference between Sater and Hijab.

A690 : This question crops up so regularly that I feel that I have no choice but to discuss it every now and then. I am taking it up anew this time to reply to several readers who have raised it, giving only the two above examples, hoping that those of my readers who have no quarrels with me about it will understand that the nature of the question makes it imperative that I give it a full treatment every now and then. The report of Lady Aisha speaks of her covering her face with her head cover. The term used in the Arabic text, "Jibab", means: "Shirt, a piece of clothing which a woman uses to cover her head and chest, a wide dress of a woman, or head-cover." It is indeed the same word which is used in the verse quoted in the second letter. That verse may be translated as follows: "Prophet, enjoin your wives, your daughters and women believers to draw their clothes around them. That is more proper, so that they may be recognized and not be molested." The point is that a Muslim woman will be recognized by the fact that she is totally dressed and people realize that they have to respect her and dare not molest her. The verse does not suggest in any way that her head-cover or shirt or clothing or whatever meaning we give to the word "Jibab", should be used to cover her face. As for the Lady Aisha and the way she used her garment to cover her face, we must not forget that Lady Aisha was one of the Prophet's wives for whom certain exceptional rules apply. These rules do not apply to any other woman. For example, the Prophet's wives were not allowed to marry any person after the Prophet, not because they are described in the Qur'an as "Mothers of the Believers", but because they were married to the most noble of Allah's servants. They were indeed mothers of the believers, but that position did not allow them to appear in front of people in the same way as a mother appears before her sons. Another special rule is that their reward for their good deeds is doubled, and the punishment of any cardinal sin committed by any one of them -- Allah forbid that any of them should commit such a sin -- is also doubled. Another rule which applies to them alone is that they speak to people from behind a screen. That is the reason why Lady Aisha covered her face when the Prophet's companion, Safwan Ibn Al-Muattal, approached. We cannot conclude from this particular incident any rule which applies to all Muslim women. My first questioner says that his wife subscribes to the view which is different from mine, requiring Muslim women to cover their faces. I realize that this is the view advocated by a number of scholars. I should explain that I have not invented this view. The majority of Muslim scholars, ever since the time of the Prophet, including leading authorities in the four major schools of thought, have recorded this view. Many of them comment on Verse 31 in Surah 24, which is incidentally the verse stating the nature of dress of Muslim women in public, and they explain that a Muslim woman may reveal her face and the lower part of her hands, up to the wrists. In translation this verse may read: "Enjoin believing women to turn their eyes away from temptation and to preserve their chastity; to cover their adornment (except such as is normally displayed); to draw their head-covering over their bosoms, etc." It is the meaning of the term "adornment" that needs explanation. Al Jassas, a leading authority in the Hanafi school of thought, says: 'Our scholars say that this denotes the woman's face and lower hands'. Al-Qurtobi, a leading Maliki scholar, says: "Since the normal case is that a woman's face and lower part of her hands are revealed by the force of habit and for worship, as this is the case in prayer and pilgrimage, then it is appropriate to say that the exemption here applies to them." Al Kharzin, a Shafie commentator on the Qur'an quotes early authorities as saying that the exemption applies to a woman's face and hands. Ibn Qudamah, a most prominent Hanbali authority says: The whole body of a woman must be covered except her face. With respect to her hands too, there are two views." Furthermore, Imam Ibn Hazm says: "The part of woman's body which must be covered is the whole of it except her face and the lower part of her hands." Having quoted all these authorities from the four major schools of thought, as well as Imam Ibn Hazm, I have little to add except to say that this is not a personal view of mine. Far be it from me to advocate anything other than what I believe to be supported by the weightier evidence. I do respect scholars who maintain a different view because I believe that they also assert what they believe to be true. However, I feel that their argument is weaker and their evidence suspect. There are numerous Hadiths and reports from the time of the Prophet which confirm that women at that time did not cover their faces in normal situations. Before I quote any of these, however, let me refer to Verse 30 in Surah 24 which requires Muslim men to "lower their gaze", or to give it a clearer translation, to "turn away from temptation". Let me ask my first reader and his wife: If all Muslim women at the time of the Prophet covered all their bodies, including their faces, why should Muslim men be required to turn their faces away, or to lower their gaze? What would they be looking at if there was nothing to look at any way? Now consider this report: "A woman came to the Prophet and said: 'Messenger of Allah, I have come to make of myself a gift to you'. The Prophet looked at her and sized her up then looked down, (i.e. he did not answer her). When she realized that he did not wish to say anything, she sat down." Another version of this report says that one of the Prophet's companions proposed to her but he had nothing to give her as dower, or mahr. The Prophet told him to give her anything, even an iron ring. He then married her". The point here is that Prophet looked at her and sized her up. If she was totally covered, why would he look at her in this way. Jabir Ibn Abdullah quotes the Prophet as saying: "If any of you sees a woman and likes her, let him go to his wife, because that is enough to satisfy him. If he is unmarried let him remember what Allah says: "Let those who cannot afford to marry live in continence until Allah shall enrich them with his bounty." Again let me ask: Why did the Prophet give such instruction without warning Muslim men against looking at women in this way? A young companion of the Prophet, Al Fadhl Ibn Abbas was riding behind him when a woman stopped the Prophet to put some questions to him. Al Fadhl looked at her and she looked at him. The Prophet turned Al Fadhl's face the other way..." Here we have a man looking at a woman and Prophet does not even tell him not to look at her. The fact that he turned his face away with his hand does not mean more than the gesture itself. It cannot be interpreted as requiring the woman to cover her face. The term "Sater" is a very general one, meaning "cover". "Hijab" has come to mean, over the years, the veil. However, in many books on Islam and in a number of Muslim countries, the word means no more than the Islamic dress of women which is supposed to cover all their bodies with the exception of their faces and their hands up to the wrists.

http://www.islamicity.org/dialogue/Q690.htm


Have a look at the site it is a very good one full of references.I am sorry that you felt offended by what I said sister.I hope you know that it would be the last thing as a Muslim I would intentionally wanna do.And the fact that you took the time to contradict what I posted is mashallah,this is what I mean with sisters being in the offensive instead of constantly justifying themselves to Non Muslims or to anybody including those who think like myself.There is difference of opinion on this matter.Fard however shouldn't be a controversial issue imam Malik, Abu hanifah, Ahmed and Shafii among others may allah grant them Rahma, all emphasized on this very carefully,it is serious matter.There is no reason why Allah swt or The prophet Salla llahu aleihi wassallam would have not explicitly mentioned this detail if it was.

The Niquab I believe Wallahu Allam is more a matter of Hajja wa daroura.It maybe adopted in individual cases as a choice because some of the Sahabiyat did indeed wear the Niquaab but not to be pushed as a general ruling.The financial crisis nowadays is rampant.There Muslim sisters left alone with children to provide for are popping out in every corner of the world in very precarious conditions.We do not have the proper institutions to offer an alternative and we can not assume the kuffar to do it either,we can not put them this sort of pressure on top.

.I would love to hear or read sisters discusse other matters as well,inshallah

This here is a very Good Website check it out.

http://www.muhajabah.com/niqabdalils.htm




Wallahu Allam Wa alla Wa Ahkam

Wassalamu Aleikum Wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu.

[um muhammad al-mahdi]

And from that I will have to say the Niqaab does not bring more harm than benefit. Wallaahi akhi, being a guy you might not even REALIZE a lot of these benefits. It's not even about the looks, it's not about the attention, it's about what niqaab stands for as a Muslimah (to that individual) and how it changes the person themselves. It's not just about others; niqaab changes the individual when they do it for Allaah, and I will challenge any Muslimah who says otherwise. It makes you approach the world in a different manner, direct your behavior in a different manner - it's more than just a cloth I agree, and it's more than just what makes a person 'good' - but it definitely has more weight than just a decision.

:salam2:

you took the words out of my mouth sis, mashaAllah!

:jazaak:

[justoneofmillion]

:salam2:Further quotes from classical Scholars of different madhabs on Awra.
From the Hanafi Madhab:

In al-Mabsut of Muhammad al-Shaybani (vol.3, 56-58):
وأما المرأة الحرة التي لا نكاح بينه وبينها ولا حرمة ممن يحل له نكاحها فليس ينبغي له أن ينظر إلى شيء منها مكشوفا إلا الوجه والكف. ولا بأس بأن ينظر إلى وجهها وإلى كفها ولا ينظر إلى شيء غير ذلك منها وهذا قول أبي حنيفة وقال الله تبارك وتعالى (وقل للمؤمنات يغضضن من أبصارهن ويحفظن فروجهن ولا يبدين زينتهن إلا ما ظهر منها) ففسر المفسرون أن ما ظهر منها الكحل والخاتم والكحل زينة الوجه والخاتم زينة الكف فرخص في هاتين الزينتين ولا بأس بأن ينظر إلى وجهها وكفها إلا أن يكون إنما ينظر إلى ذلك اشتهاء منه لها فان كان ذلك فليس ينبغي له أن ينظر إليه.

The free woman whom (a) he is not married to or (b) there is no sacred relationship and whom he is allowed to marry, he should not look at any part of her uncovered except that face and hand. It is ok for him to look at her face and hand but he shouldn’t look at any other part of her. This is Abu Hanifa’s view. And Allah the Mighty and Majestic said (Tell the believing women to lower their gaze, protect their private parts and show of their beauty only that which is apparent). The scholars of tafsir said that what is apparent is the eyeshadow and the ring. The eyeshadow is the beauty of the face, and the ring is the beauty of the hand. So he allowed these two beauties. Thus He allowed looking at her hand and her face, unless he’s looking at it with desire. And if that is the case he should not look at it.

Hujjat al-Islam al-Jassas (d.370h) says in Ahkam al-Qur'an (vol.3, p.408):
"They do not show their adornment (zina) except that which is apparent" [al-Nur]... Our associates (i.e. the Hanafis) said: what is meant is the face and hands because kuhl (eyeliner) is the adornment of the face and dye and rings are the adornment of the hands. So if it is permissible to look at the adornment of the face and the hands then of course it is permissible to look at the face and hands. And the evidence that the face and hands of a woman are not 'awra (what should be covered) is that she prays with her face and hands uncovered, and if they were 'awra she would have to cover them the way she covers that which is 'awra.
[After talking about the conditions where a man can look at a woman's face and hands, he continues]
Ibn Mas'ud's view that what is apparent is the clothes has no meaning. Because it is known that what is mentioned is the adornment, but what is intended is the part of the body on which the adornment is placed. Don't you see that the rest of of things that she adorns herself with -trinkets, bracelets, anklets and necklaces- can be shown to men if she is not wearing them? Thus we know that what is meant is the place where the adornment is worn as He said in the following part of the recitation "And they should only show their adornment (zina) to their husband" and what is meant is where the adornment is worn. So to interpret it (i.e. adornment) to mean the clothes doesn't make any sense.

Al-Tahawi (d.321h), Sharh Ma‘ani al-Athar, vol.2, pp.338-339:
[When discussing whether men’s thighs are ‘awra he draws a parallel]
This can be seen by reasoned arguments. We see that a man may look at a woman who is not related to him in any way and look at her face and hands. He will not look above that at her head, nor below that at her stomach, back, thighs or calves. But we see that the mahram may look at her chest, her hair, her face, her head, her calves, but will not look between those two parts of her body.
(vol.3, p.377) [When discussing whether it’s permissible to look at women for marriage]
Once it is established that looking at a woman’s face to marry her is halal, its ruling is no longer the ruling of the ‘awra, because we know that what is ‘awra is not permissible to see by the one seeking marriage. Do you not see that the one who wants to marry a woman cannot see her hair because it’s haram, or what is below that of the body, in the same way as it is forbidden for the one who does not want to marry her?
Thus once it is established that looking at her face is halal for the one who wants to marry her, it is also established that it is permissible for the one who does not want to marry her if he does not intend by looking that which is haram.
And it is said about the statement of Allah the mighty and majestic: “They do not show their adornment (zina) except that which is apparent”, the exception being the face and hands, and this agrees with the interpretation we mentioned of the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.). And amongst those who adopted this view: Muhammad bin al-Hasan. This is how Sulayman bin Shu‘ayb narrated it to me from his father from Muhammad. And all of this is the view of Abu Hanifa, Abu Yusuf and Muhammad, may Allah grant them all his mercy.


al-Sarakhsi (d.490h) in al-Mabsut (vol.12, p.371):
It is aceptable to look at her face and hands. The face is where one wears kuhl and the hands is where one wears rings and dye, and that is the meaning of His the exalted’s statement “except that which is apparent”. And the fear of fitna may also be by looking at her clothes. Someone once said: “Nothing deluded me like the dye on her hands, the kuhl in her eyes and her coloured garments.” Yet there is no doubt that it is permissible to look at her clothes and the fear of fitna is not taken into account, and the same occurs with her hands and face. And al-Hasan bin Ziyad narrated from Abu Hanifa that it is permissible to see her feet also, and al-Tahawi also mentioned it. This is because, just as she necessarily shows her face in her transactions with men, and just as she necessarily shows her hands when she’s taken and giving things, she also necessarily shows her feet if she is walking barefoot or with sandals because she may not always have socks available.
And in Jami‘ al-Baramika it is mentioned from Abu Yusuf that it is permissible to look at her forearms also because when she makes bread or washes clothes she necessarily shows her forearms. It is said: It is also permissible to look at her teeth because they show when she is speaking to men.
And all of this is only if there is no desire involved in looking. If he knows that if he looks he will feel desire it is not permissible for him to look at her at all because of his (s.a.w.) saying: “The one who looks at the beauty of a non-mahram woman with desire will have lead poured in his eyes on the Day of Judgment.”

Al-Samarqandi (d.539h) in Tuhfat al-Fuqaha (vol.3, pp.334-335):
[Talking about non-mahram women] He is forbidden to look at her from her head to her toes, except for the face and hands, as it is acceptable to look at them without desire. But he if he thinks that he will feel desire it is forbidden for him to look.
As for touching, it is forbidden whether with desire or without desire. This is if she is a young woman. But if she is old it is ok to shake her hand if he thinks he will not feel desire.
It is not permissible to shake hands if she will feel desire even if the man does not feel desire.
Under necessity it is permissible to look even if feeling desire. For example, the qadi and the witness may look at her face in court when taking witness, or if he wants to marry her, because the point [of looking in these cases] is not to satisfy one’s desire, as is narrated from the Prophet (‘alayhi salam) that he said to al-Mughira bin Shu‘ba “If you look at her it may be more appropriate to enrich your marriage.” (translation of this hadith is a bit rough)
As for looking at the feet: Is it forbidden? It is mentioned in Kitab al-Istihsan that it is ‘awra as regards looking, but it is not ‘awra in prayer. In al-Ziyadat an indication is mentioned that it is not ‘awra as regards the prayer.
But Ibn Shuja‘ mentioned from al-Hasan from Abu Hanifa that they are not ‘awra. In terms of looking they are like the face and hands.


Maliki Madhhab

Malik said in the Mudawwana regarding zihar (vol.3, pp.82-83):

قلت: أرأيت المرأة إذا ظاهر منها زوجها هل يجب عليها أن تمنعه نفسها؟ قال: قال مالك: نعم، تمنعه نفسها قال: ولا يصلح له أن ينظر إلى شعرها ولا إلى صدرها. قال: فقلت لمالك أفينظر إلى وجهها، فقال: نعم وقد ينظر غيره أيضا إلى وجهها.
I (Sahnun) said: What do you see regarding a woman whose husband has done zihar of her. Does she deny herself to him? He (Ibn al-Qasim) said: Malik said: Yes, she denies herself to him. He also said: And he should not look at her hair and at her chest. He (Ibn al-Qasim) said: So I said to Malik: May he look at her face? He said: Yes, and someone else can also look at her face.

And in the ‘Utbiyya (with Ibn Rushd’s commentary al-Bayan wa’l-Tahsil, vol. 4, p.304):
وسئل مالك عن الرجل يريد تزويج المرأة فيريد أن يغتفلها النظر إما من الكوة ونحوها لينظر إلى جمالها ، قال : ليدخل عليها بإذن ، قال : قلت لا يريد ذلك وإنما يريد أن يغتفلها فقال : ما سمعت فيه شيئا ، فقيل إن قوماً يحدثون في ذلك بأحاديث فقال : وما ذلك ؟ قلت له يقولون إن له ذلك ، قال وما سمعت وإني لأكره ذلك .

Malik was asked about a man who wants to marry a woman and he wants to look at her without her knowing, from a small window or something similar to look at her beauty. He (Malik) said: He should go and see her with permission. I (Talq bin Habib) said: He doesn’t want that. All he wants is to look at her without her knowing. He (Malik) said: I haven’t heard anything about it. Someone said: Some people narrate hadith about it. He said: And what is it? I (Talq) said: They say he can do that. He said: I haven’t heard and I dislike that.


Ibn Habib (who studied with a lot of Malik’s students) said regarding what a woman has to wear during the prayer (Nawadir, vol. 1, p.205):

و لا يَظْهَر منها غيرُ دَوْرِ الوَجْهِ و الكَفَّيْنِ ، و كلُّ ما غَطَّتْ به رأسها فهو خِمارٌ ، و لو كان تحتَ القميص مِئْزَرٌ فهو أَبْلَغُ ، و إلاَّ فَيُجْزِئُهَا ، و لا يَبْدُو منها لغيرِ ذَوِي مَحْرَمٍ غيرَ ما يَبْدُو فِي الصَّلاَةِ
Nothing should be apparent from her except her face and hands. Everything that covers her head is khimar. And if below the qamis she wears a mi’zar it is better, and if not it’s still valid. And she should not show to those who aren’t mahrams anything other than what is shown during the prayer.

Shafi'i Madhhab

al-Shafi‘i said in al-Umm (vol. 1, p.89):
وَكُلُّ الْمَرْأَةِ عَوْرَةٌ إلَّا كَفَّيْهَا وَوَجْهَهَا وَظَهْرَ قَدَمَيْهَا عَوْرَةٌ
All the woman is ‘awra except for her hands and face. And the bottom of her feet are ‘awra.

al-Muzani (student of al-Shafi'i, d.264h) in Mukhtasar al-Muzani fi furu' al-Shafi'iya (p.219):
Allah the exalted said: "They do not show their adornment (zina) except that which is apparent". He said: The face and hands.

al-Rafi'i (d.623h) Fath al-'Aziz sharh al-Wajiz (vol.4, p.88):
As for the woman, if she is a freewoman, all of her body is 'awra except for her face and hands because of His statement: "They do not show their adornment (zina) except that which is apparent". The commentators of Qur'an said it is the face and hands. What is meant is not just the palms. Rather the front and back of both arms up to the elbow are both excluded from the 'awra.

al-Nawawi (d.676h) in Rawdat al-Talibin (p.1170 or vol.2, p.455):
The man looking at the woman: It is forbidden to look at her 'awra, and to her face and hands if he fears fitna. If he does not fear fitna there are two views: Most the associates (i.e. the Shafi'ies), specially the earlier ones, say it is not forbidden because of the saying of Allah the exalted: "They do not show their adornment (zina) except that which is apparent" and this is understood to mean the face and hands. But it is disliked, as stated by Shaykh Abu Hamid [al-Ghazali] and others. The second [view]: it is forbidden. Al-Istakhiri and Abu Ali al-Tabari stated it, and Shaykh Abu Muhammad and al-Imam [al-Juwayni?] preferred it. The author of al-Muhadhdhab (al-Shirazi) and al-Rawayani declared it certain.

Hanbali Madhhab & ibn Taymiyyah

al-Insaf by al-Mardawi on the woman’s ‘awra (vol.1, pp.195-196):
قوله: "والحرة كلها عورة حتى ظفرها وشعرها إلا الوجه".
الصحيح من المذهب: أن الوجه ليس بعورة وعليه الأصحاب وحكاه القاضي إجماعا وعنه الوجه عورة أيضا قال الزركشي أطلق الإمام أحمد القول بأن جميعها عورة وهو محمول على ما عدا الوجه أو على غير الصلاة انتهى وقال بعضهم الوجه عورة وإنما كشف في الصلاة للحاجة قال الشيخ تقي الدين والتحقيق أنه ليس بعورة في الصلاة وهو عورة في باب النظر إذا لم يجز النظر إليه انتهى.
قوله: "وفي الكفين روايتان".
وأطلقهما في الجامع الصغير والهداية والمبهج والفصول والتذكرة له والمذهب ومسبوك الذهب والمستوعب والكافي والهادي والخلاصة والتلخيص والبلغة والمحرر والشرح وابن تميم والفائق وابن عبيدان والزركشي والمذهب الأحمد والحاوي الصغير"
إحداهما: هما عورة وهي المذهب عليه الجمهور قال في الفروع اختارها الأكثر قال الزركشي هي اختيار القاضي في التعليق قال وهو ظاهر كلام أحمد وجزم به الخرقي وفي المنور والمنتخب والطريق الأقرب وقدمه في الإيضاح والرعاية والنظم وتجريد العناية وإدراك الغاية والفروع.
والرواية الثانية: ليستا بعورة جزم به في العمدة والإفادات والوجيز والنهاية والنظم واختارها المجد في شرحه وصاحب مجمع البحرين: وابن منجا وابن عبيدان وابن عبدوس في تذكرته والشيخ تقي الدين.
قلت: وهو الصواب وقدمه في الحاوي الكبير وابن رزين في شرحه وصححه شيخنا في تصحيح المحرر.
تنبيهان: أحدهما: صرح المصنف أن ما عدا الوجه والكفين عورة وهو صحيح وهو المذهب وعليه الأصحاب وحكاه ابن المنذر إجماعا في الخمار واختار الشيخ تقي الدين أن القدمين ليسا بعورة أيضا.
قلت: وهو الصواب.
قوله: "والحرة كلها عورة حتى ظفرها وشعرها إلا الوجه".
الصحيح من المذهب: أن الوجه ليس بعورة وعليه الأصحاب وحكاه القاضي إجماعا وعنه الوجه عورة أيضا قال الزركشي أطلق الإمام أحمد القول بأن جميعها عورة وهو محمول على ما عدا الوجه أو على غير الصلاة انتهى وقال بعضهم الوجه عورة وإنما كشف في الصلاة للحاجة قال الشيخ تقي الدين والتحقيق أنه ليس بعورة في الصلاة وهو عورة في باب النظر إذا لم يجز النظر إليه انتهى.
قوله: "وفي الكفين روايتان".
وأطلقهما في الجامع الصغير والهداية والمبهج والفصول والتذكرة له والمذهب ومسبوك الذهب والمستوعب والكافي والهادي والخلاصة والتلخيص والبلغة والمحرر والشرح وابن تميم والفائق وابن عبيدان والزركشي والمذهب الأحمد والحاوي الصغير"
إحداهما: هما عورة وهي المذهب عليه الجمهور قال في الفروع اختارها الأكثر قال الزركشي هي اختيار القاضي في التعليق قال وهو ظاهر كلام أحمد وجزم به الخرقي وفي المنور والمنتخب والطريق الأقرب وقدمه في الإيضاح والرعاية والنظم وتجريد العناية وإدراك الغاية والفروع.
والرواية الثانية: ليستا بعورة جزم به في العمدة والإفادات والوجيز والنهاية والنظم واختارها المجد في شرحه وصاحب مجمع البحرين: وابن منجا وابن عبيدان وابن عبدوس في تذكرته والشيخ تقي الدين.
قلت: وهو الصواب وقدمه في الحاوي الكبير وابن رزين في شرحه وصححه شيخنا في تصحيح المحرر.
تنبيهان
أحدهما: صرح المصنف أن ما عدا الوجه والكفين عورة وهو صحيح وهو المذهب وعليه الأصحاب وحكاه ابن المنذر إجماعا في الخمار واختار الشيخ تقي الدين أن القدمين ليسا بعورة أيضا.
قلت: وهو الصواب.

The statement: The free woman is ‘awra, even her nails and her hair, except the face.
The correct opinion in the madhhab is that the face isn’t ‘awra, and the ashab are upon this. And the Qadi (Abu Ya‘la) narrated consensus on it. And he also narrates that the face is ‘awra.

Al-Zarkashi said: Imam Ahmad said unrestrictedly that all of her is ‘awra, and it is taken to mean except the face, or outside of the prayer.

Some said: The face is ‘awra and it is only uncovered in the prayer due to necessity.

Shaykh Taqi al-Din (Ibn Taymiyya) said: The tahqiq is that it is not ‘awra in the prayer but it is ‘awra in terms of looking because it is not allowed to look at it.
The statement: There are two narrations regarding the hands.

They (the two narrations) are mentioned in al-Jami al-kabir, al-Hidaya, al-Mubhij, al-Fusul, al-Tadhkira of it, al-Madhhab, Masbuk al-dhahab, al-Mustaw‘ib, al-Kafi, al-Hadi, al-Khulasa, al-Talkhis, al-Bulgha, al-Muharrar, al-Sharh, Ibn Tamim, al-Fa’iq, Ibn ‘Ubaydan, al-Zarkashi, al-Madhhab al-ahmad and al-Hawi al-saghir.
One of the two (narrations): It is ‘awra, and it is the madhhab and the view of the majority.

He (Ibn Muflih) said in al-Furu‘: The majority selected it. He then said: It is the apparent meaning of what Ahmad said, and al-Khiraqi declared it as certain, as it is in al-Munawwar and al-Muntakhab. And it was given precedence in al-Idah, al-Ri‘aya, al-Nazm, Tajrid al-‘inaya, Idrak al-ghaya and al-Furu‘.

The second narration: They are not ‘awra. Declared as certain in al-‘Umda, al-Ifadat, al-Wajiz, al-Nihaya and al-Nazm. Al-Majd (Ibn Taymiyya’s granddad) chose it in his Sharh, as did the author of Majma‘ al-bahrayn, Ibn Munajja, Ibn ‘Ubaydan, Ibn ‘Abdus in his Tadhkira and Shaykh Taqi al-Din.

I say: It is correct, he gave it precedence in al-Hawi al-kabir, as did Ibn Zurayn in his Sharh and our Shaykh confirmed it as sound in his checking of al-Muharrar.
Two points: The author clearly stated: Anything other than the face and hands is ‘awra, and it is sound, and it is the madhhab and the ashab are upon that. And Ibn al-Mundhir claimed it is consensus as regards the khimar. And Shaykh Taqi al-Din chose that the feet are also not ‘awra.
I said: And it is correct.

What one is allowed to look at in a woman (vol. 2, p.1341):
فلا يجوز له النظر إلى الأجنبية قصدا وهو صحيح وهو المذهب.
وجوز جماعة من الأصحاب نظر الرجل من الحرة الأجنبية إلى ما ليس بعورة صلاة.
وجزم به في المستوعب في آدابه وذكره الشيخ تقي الدين رواية.
قال القاضي المحرم ما عدا الوجه والكفين.
وصرح القاضي في الجامع أنه لا يجوز النظر إلى المرأة الأجنبية لغير حاجة.
ثم قال النظر إلى العورة محرم وإلى غير العورة مكروه.
وهكذا ذكر ابن عقيل وأبو الحسين.
وقال أبو الخطاب لا يجوز النظر لغير من ذكرنا إلا أن القاضي أطلق هذه العبارة وحكى الكراهة في غير العورة.
قال الشيخ تقي الدين رحمه الله هل يحرم النظر إلى وجه الأجنبية لغير حاجة رواية عن الإمام أحمد يكره ولا يحرم.
وقال ابن عقيل لا يحرم النظر إلى وجه الأجنبية إذا أمن الفتنة انتهى.
قلت وهذا الذي لا يسع الناس غيره خصوصا للجيران والأقارب غير المحارم الذين نشأ بينهم وهو مذهب الشافعي.

It is not permissible for him to look at a non-mahram woman (ajnabiya) on purpose. It is sound and it is the madhhab. And a group of the madhhab scholars allowed the man to see of the free ajnabiya what is not ‘awra in the prayer. He declared it as certain in al-Mustaw‘ib in the section on adab and Taqi al-Din mentioned it as a narration (from Ahmad).

The Qadi said: What is forbidden is other than the face and hands. The Qadi said in al-Jami‘: It is not permissible to look at an ajnabiya woman except when necessary. Then he said: Looking at the ‘awra is forbidden, and other than the ‘awra is disliked (makruh). And this is what was mentioned by Ibn ‘Aqil and Abu ’l-Husayn. Abu ’l-Khattab said: It is not permissible to look at other than those we mentioned, except that the Qadi used the phrase unrestrictedly and mentioned that it is disliked [to look at] other than the ‘awra.

Shaykh Taqi al-Din (rahimahullah) said: Is it forbidden to look at the face of the ajnabiya without necessity? It is narrated from Imam Ahmad that it’s disliked but it is not forbidden. Ibn ‘Aqil said: It is not forbidden to look at the face of an ajnabiya if he does not fear fitna.

I said: This is what people cannot help doing, specially with neighbours and relatives one has grown up with. And it is the madhhab of al-Shafi‘i


Wassalaam Aleikum warahmatullahi wa barakatuhu.

[Mabsoot]

Assalamu alaykum justoneofmillion, these discussions about the niqab and hijab have been made before. Also, rather than copying pasting things in this thread, you should have created a new one with the topic, and put a link here, it makes reading a lot easier.

Yes, there are matters of opinion, but, if the sisters follow the evidences and want to wear the niqab then you should respect that. They love to wear the niqab, let it be.

[justoneofmillion]

Yes, there are matters of opinion, but, if the sisters follow the evidences and want to wear the niqab then you should respect that. They love to wear the niqab, let it be.Wa Aleikumu Assalaam wa rahmatullah,

I don't think you understood what I posted. This is not an emotional discussion I was expecting.I said that I do not oppose it,that I respected that and that I was totally against any law forbidding it or telling sisters how to dress.I couldn't be more clear than this I think.

Am not in the position to tell people how to dress, this isn't my intention.I was merely interested in discussing the evidence of those who wanna make it Fard on others,that is what I did.


Be well

Wassalamu Aleikum wa Rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu

[al-fajr]

I don't think you understood what I posted. This is not an emotional discussion I was expecting.I said that I do not oppose it,that I respected that and that I was totally against any law forbidding it or telling sisters how to dress.I couldn't be more clear than this I think.

Am not in the position to tell people how to dress, this isn't my intention.I was merely interested in discussing the evidence of those who wanna make it Fard on others,that is what I did..

The prophet Salla llahu Aleihi wassalaam always choose the easy way of two ,given the fact that the other was not forbidden.If it was an obligation the prophet who have told the woman to wear it as she came to ask him about Hajj in the presence of Al fadl as reported in Saheeh Bukhari .Make it simple people,if you wanna do Dawah and not scare people away especially women, by making Islam look like a very difficult religion to practice.
Akhi, when doing da'wah, the non-muslims find out we are obligated to pray 5 times a day. They repeat it, 'Five times a day?!' and they often look as if this was an impossible task, why? Because they don't understand the characteristic of submission in a Muslim. Does their shock, and sometimes contempt towards our obligatory duties as Muslims, hold any weight in our decision and readiness to carry them out? No.

For niqaab, there is a legitimate difference of opinion based on evidences, however bringing up the point of da'wah and 'ease' proves that your opinion on the matter is not solely based on the evidences; other factors, like the perceptions of the kuffar towards Muslim women, are influencing your opinion and I believe this to be quite wrong.

I mean no disrespect.

Wa-salaam

[justoneofmillion]

Akhi, when doing da'wah, the non-muslims find out we are obligated to pray 5 times a day. They repeat it, 'Five times a day?!' and they often look as if this was an impossible task, why? Because they don't understand the characteristic of submission in a Muslim. Does their shock, and sometimes contempt towards our obligatory duties as Muslims, hold any weight in our decision and readiness to carry them out? No.

For niqaab, there is a legitimate difference of opinion based on evidences, however bringing up the point of da'wah and 'ease' proves that your opinion on the matter is not solely based on the evidences; other factors, like the perceptions of the kuffar towards Muslim women, are influencing your opinion and I believe this to be quite wrong.

I mean no disrespect.

Wa-salaam:salam2:

What I mean by ease is to give oneself the opportunity to have a descent living and participating fully, impacting society and accomplishing all the tasks in the field required for that.I wanted to emphasize on the dimension of flexibility as well instead of one based purely on visibility.

Sisters going out there and actually challenge the feminists on their catastrophic impact(prostitution,anti depressant consume,alcoholism,divorce,abortion,anorexia...etc ) instead of being kept busy arguing against each other on Hijab, Niquaab issues for example.(There are many such cases).

We can not always do that as brothers.What about the sisters who are left alone with children who's gonna take care of them Ameer al mouminin,with predefined boarders and a global baitul maal or does she have to rely on the Kuffar ?How undignified would that be if she could do otherwise?If we could only create our own support institutions in the west especially for this matter,that would be great.The misery of Muslims is also around us,we do not have to look at some other continent constantly.There are some services that support women and such but it is not enough.The money spent in building enormous over expensive mosques could be spent otherwise.Wallahu Allam.

When one makes it a Fard on other he must keep in mind that different women are surrounded by different circumstances and have to get out there and make a living somehow.It is difficult for women with Niqaab to get proper Jobs nowadays in the west,we might keep the right to our personal choices but we can not force or blame employers who are suffocated by the hype of competition to comply with it.Imagine some non Muslim woman going to Saudi Arabia where covering is Fard or a certain minimum is required and dress in her own ways,would you blame the guy for not giving her the job?We would pay her the first camel on the way back.

If the women of the Salaf used to be like that I do not see why it would be of non Muslim influence.Sheikh Al Albani Rahimahoullah stated this very clearly in his book,he actually was much harsher and insisting."

As to making this obligation a compulsory law for all women everywhere and in all eras, even if there did not exist any harm for veiled women, No. Absolutely not. Allaah was truthful when He said,

"Do they have partners who legislated for them in the religion what Allaah did not permit??"

These are the most significant of the extremist opposition’s mistakes which I thought needed brief mention due their strong link to the contents of this book. I then closed ar-Radd al-Mufhim with a reminder that extremism in the religion – considering that the Wise Legislator forbade it will not bring any good. And it is not possible for it to produce a generation of young Muslim women carrying Islaamic knowledge and practice moderately balanced, with neither excesses nor deficiencies. Not like what I have heard about some young female adherents in Arab countries when they heard the Prophet’s statement, “The woman in ihraam should neither wear a niqaab nor gloves,” they did not accept it saying instead, “We will wear our niqaabs and gloves!” No doubt, this was a direct result of the extremist views which they heard regarding the obligation of covering their faces.

I certainly cannot imagine that this type of extremism – and this is only one example from many which I have – can possibly produce for us salafee women able to do everything their religiously guided social life demands of them in a way similar to the righteous women of the Salaf."Excerpt from Jilbab al Maraa Al Muslima

A lot of Senor Saudi scholars tried to refute him after this and started accusing him of opening the door to Tabarujj.He wrote his Ar-Radd ul-mufhim And challenged them one by one ,bringing forth evidence after evidence asking them to contradict him,they haven't brought fourth any refutation ,the challenge is still open.He shows among other how they use Philosophy and Qiyas to prove their claims.Usually when those who say Niquaab is Fard read this book, all they do is calm down and smile.

You can download it here if you read Arabic,if not look for some English version:
http://alalbany.net/albany_doc_books.php



Surely his conclusion can not be based on non Muslim influence,therefore mine can not be dismissed as such.I was referring to this hadeeth as well"

Aishah (May Allah be pleased with her) reported: Whenever the Prophet (PBUH) was given a choice between two matters, he would (always) choose the easier as long as it was not sinful to do so; but if it was sinful he was most strict in avoiding it. He never took revenge upon anybody for his own sake; but when Allah's Legal Bindings were outraged, he would take revenge for Allah's sake.
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].

The Dawah question however I admit it might be caused by the fact that I live in a western country which I consider to be part of Allah swt earth and perceive this approach to be more discreet and perfectly compliant with notions of affirmation, modesty and Non-Objectification.Wallahu Aalaam am but a banal observer.How would the question of the four witnesses be even possible for example,when one can not even identify the women?I ask questions I have no legitimacy to force solutions.

On the other hand Am a hundred percent pro Polygamy ,it is clear in the Quraan if the conditions are met I think it is a great alternative to many problems,not for myself but for others who wish to do so and are fine with it.

Note:Please keep in mind that I am saying this even under close supervision,and that the information shared is to be kept strictly confidential.

How could I think through the eyes of Non Muslims in anyway,I do not think that way Alhamdulillah.

Finally,Am saying this with the most genuine intention on how I perceive things, Allah swt is my witness, am the last one to like seeing my sisters sad or cause them pain.May he protect me from ever wishing or thinking like that.You have no idea how I despise seeing Non Muslims even getting close to the subject,while preaching freedom and liberalism,go figure.It remains a Muslim matter.

Take care.

Wassalamu Aleikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu

[UmmIsaiah]

Quick question...
I was told that the scholars have concluded that since a woman does not wear the niqab during Hajj and Umrah she is not to pray in it at all. Now since I have never read nor heard this until recently I was just wondering if any one else had heard this if so PLEASE TELL ME WHERE I CAN FIND THIS (or link where you get this from). Thank you